Patna High Court
Tarkeshwar Prasad @ Tarkeshwar KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Tarkeshwar Prasad, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Sections 316(5), 318(4) and 61(2) of the Bihar Food and Civil Supplies Act, 2023, alleging misappropriation of Rs.1,74,19,438.31. The FIR arose because the petitioner, as proprietor of Ominor Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd., purchased grains from nine Primary Agricultural Cooperatives (PACS) but failed to deposit the required CMR with the State Food Corporation by the statutory deadline, despite having earlier accepted liability and promised payment. The State and the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation argued that the petitioner’s admission of liability and subsequent non‑payment demonstrated a clear intent to misappropriate the grains and funds. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated and that he was not afforded sufficient time to make the payment. After considering the submissions, the Court concluded that the petitioner’s conduct did not merit the grant of anticipatory bail and rejected the application.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate exercise of discretion by the Court in granting or refusing anticipatory bail under Sections 316(5), 318(4) and 61(2) of the Bihar Food and Civil Supplies Act, 2023?
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- misappropriation
- Bihar Food and Civil Supplies Act
- criminal procedure
- CMR deposit
- public distribution system
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17016 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-358 Year-2025 Thana- Raghunathpur District- East Champaran
======================================================
Tarkeshwar Prasad @ Tarkeshwar Kumar S/o- Late Tanu Prasd Verma @ Late
Nanhu Prasad Verma viilage- Raghunathpur PS-Raghunathpur Dist- East
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, Ltd. District Manager,
Motihari Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the BSFC.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No.358/2025, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4) and 61(2) of
the B.N.S., 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges
that Ominor Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd. for Kharif Season 2023-
24 purchased grains from 9 PACS, but did not deposit the CMR
till 31.10.2024 with the SFC, Motihari i.e. the last date fixed by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17016 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
the government, as a result, all 9 PACS became defaulters, it is
next alleged that petitioner by his letter dated 12.11.2024
addressed to the District Cooperative Officer, East Champaran,
Motihari, took the responsibility of purchasing grains of 7
PACS, being Proprietor of the aforesaid Pvt. Ltd. company and
even assured that the defalcated amount would be deposited in
the CC account of the Samiti by 30.11.2024, but despite lapse of
considerable time, the money was not deposited, thus the instant
FIR was instituted alleging that petitioner misappropriated an
amount of Rs.1,74,19, 438.31/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that no doubt the petitioner has
accepted his liability to pay the amount but then time was not
given to him by the authorities and the instant FIR came to be
instituted.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the BSFC opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the BSFC submits that petitioner does not dispute that
he had purchased grains from 9 PACS but then the requisite
CMR was not deposited with the SFC, Motihari by 31.10.2024,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17016 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
as such letters were written by the District Cooperative Officer
to the petitioner dated 27.07.2024 and 21.09.2024, requesting
the petitioner to pay the amount, the petitioner even accepted his
liability and assured that the payment would be made by
30.11.2024 by his letter dated 12.11.2024 but then petitioner did
not pay a single penny, even after considerable period of time
lapsing after 30.11.2024, it was then that the authorities realized
that petitioner had misappropriated the amount and does not
intend to return the amount. It is also submitted that grains
purchased by the private limited company of the petitioner was
meant for poor people but then petitioner misappropriated the
entire grain for his benefit, which amply demonstrates his
conduct, more so when the petitioner even accepts his liability.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the BSFC, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is
rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…